Evidence For Running the Ball

[El Guapo]

I looked at the play-by-play of our drives last night at Foxboro. The evidence is pretty clear to me that when we run the ball and are balanced, we move down the field. When we switch to passing mode only, we get stopped in our tracks.

Our 3 & out drives were cookie cutter with a predictable run, pass, pass play selection. The drives were we approached a 50% run/pass ratio resulted in touchdowns. Our lone FG came with a 33% run/pass ratio. All of our failed drives either were generally dominated by passing plays. The times we got first downs, we ran once or twice and then passed the ball 5 or more times straight leading to a stalled drive.


Drive #1
4 rushes / 8 passes (33% ratio)
Result: FG
Trend: the last 5 plays when the drive stalled were all passes

Drive #2
2 rushes / 6 passes
Result: Punt
Trend: 2 rushing plays early got a first down and then set up 2nd & 5, then five straight pass plays leading to a punt

Drive #3
0 rushes / 3 passes
Result: Punt
Trend: pass, pass, pass

Drive #4
6 rushes / 8 passes (43% ratio)
Result: Touchdown !!!
Trend: Good mix of rush/pass throughout the drive

Drive #5
1 rush / 5 passes
Result: Punt
Trend: After a 7 yard run to start the drive, the last 5 plays were passes

---Halftime---

Drive #6
4 rushes / 4 passes (50% ratio)
Result: Touchdown !!!
Trend: Decent mix of run/pass with 3 straight runs in the red zone gaining 19 yards

Drive #7
1 rush / 2 passes
Result: Punt
Trend: run, pass, pass

Drive #8
2 rushes / 3 passes
Result: Fumbleroosky
Trend: Good mix again was leading to another score until the fumble

Drive #9
1 rush / 2 passes
Result: Punt
Trend: run, pass, pass

Drive #10
1 rush / 9 passes
Result: Turned over on downs
Trend: It's easy to defend when you know the ball is coming through the air

 

[Cheese Headed Monster]

Those are good numbers. I do prefer tho that we set up the run with the short pass as opposed to setting up the pass with the run. Pass on first down then run on 2nd or 3rd is fine with me.

 

[PackAttack12]

I was going to do a similar breakdown later this afternoon, but your post essentially confirms what I knew my eyes were telling me throughout the game. The Packers have had some success running the football especially with Aaron Jones. Why at times they stray away from it I'll never know.

I remember the 3rd drive that you alluded to. Took all I had to keep it together. Proving to be a one trick pony, especially against a Bill Belichick team will get you beat. They were essentially giving us the run and we failed to consistently take advantage of it.

 

[Mondio]

Need more context, down distance, play, result. Defensive alignment would be good too. So many of our positive runs are set up by pass. I wish it was the other way, but we are who we are.

Anyway, I don't care how you get them, just get them. 1st downs lead to more plays. More plays leads to more balance.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I looked at the play-by-play of our drives last night at Foxboro. The evidence is pretty clear to me that when we run the ball and are balanced, we move down the field. When we switch to passing mode only, we get stopped in our tracks.

Our 3 & out drives were cookie cutter with a predictable run, pass, pass play selection. The drives were we approached a 50% run/pass ratio resulted in touchdowns. Our lone FG came with a 33% run/pass ratio. All of our failed drives either were generally dominated by passing plays. The times we got first downs, we ran once or twice and then passed the ball 5 or more times straight leading to a stalled drive.


Drive #1
4 rushes / 8 passes (33% ratio)
Result: FG
Trend: the last 5 plays when the drive stalled were all passes

Drive #2
2 rushes / 6 passes
Result: Punt
Trend: 2 rushing plays early got a first down and then set up 2nd & 5, then five straight pass plays leading to a punt

Drive #3
0 rushes / 3 passes
Result: Punt
Trend: pass, pass, pass

Drive #4
6 rushes / 8 passes (43% ratio)
Result: Touchdown !!!
Trend: Good mix of rush/pass throughout the drive

Drive #5
1 rush / 5 passes
Result: Punt
Trend: After a 7 yard run to start the drive, the last 5 plays were passes

---Halftime---

Drive #6
4 rushes / 4 passes (50% ratio)
Result: Touchdown !!!
Trend: Decent mix of run/pass with 3 straight runs in the red zone gaining 19 yards

Drive #7
1 rush / 2 passes
Result: Punt
Trend: run, pass, pass

Drive #8
2 rushes / 3 passes
Result: Fumbleroosky
Trend: Good mix again was leading to another score until the fumble

Drive #9
1 rush / 2 passes
Result: Punt
Trend: run, pass, pass

Drive #10
1 rush / 9 passes
Result: Turned over on downs
Trend: It's easy to defend when you know the ball is coming through the air

It seemed last night that they went away from the run in the second half. Strange, because until Q4, the score was close. Ironic that the game turned on a running play with Jones’ fumble. One TO a game isn’t bad, but against the Pats, it usually means failure. They do a remarkable job of jumping on opponents mistakes. Anyway, I agree with you. I’d prefer to see a more balanced attack. There have been times this year where they’ve had to pass. But when the D can anticipate that, well, even ARod is going to have a hard time. There are a lot of winnable games left, and the Pack need each one. Using the run more is a good way to meet that goal.

 

[PackAttack12]

Need more context, down distance, play, result. Defensive alignment would be good too. So many of our positive runs are set up by pass. I wish it was the other way, but we are who we are.

Anyway, I don't care how you get them, just get them. 1st downs lead to more plays. More plays leads to more balance.

Just going by the eye test, it was clear that the Packers should have been running the ball more. Down and distance is obviously important, but you have to find a way to be balanced against the Patriots.

 

[Mondio]

without the context it doesn't say much. We had 10 possessions. 3 of which were deemed a "good mix" so out of 7 more, 1 at the end of a half with 2 minutes. pass heavy seems appropriate to me. So 6 drives, 2 more are late in the 4th with us trailing and not great field position. Can't say I have a huge problem being passcentric in those situations. so we're down to 4 other possessions to critique.

I remember the one with 2 good runs and then pass, pass, pass. It was Williams and after the 2 good ones they brought another defender or 2 to the box and we set up a little dump off then with the other receivers taking defenders down field, Bulaga got beat, Williams never made it to the 'drop zone" and Rodgers goes to what he wants to do. The others i don't remember that well. 1 appears we had a good first run, then a pass for 1st down, the other looks like a run, probably not a productive one, with 2nd and 3rd and longs. Anyway, context is always important for me or we're only getting partial stories.

 

[El Guapo]

It's all here. There's just too much to type.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/playbyplay?gameId=401030858

 

[sschind]

Wait a minute. Are you honestly saying that with the greatest QB to ever play the game we should actually run the ball on occasion? And more to the point are you actually suggesting we should run it more than we do? I'm aghast at the thought.


I'm not really. I agree 100%.

 

[Mondio]

For the record, I "think" we should run more too. But i'm not sure committing to the run will ever be something Rodgers can do. and if we're needing 10 yards, 3 runs or 3 passes from Rodgers? it's not an easy answer. So my easy answer is the same as before. I don't care how, but keep getting first downs. more 1st down equals more plays and more balance from the offense. Most times we get into these big discrepancies is lack of flow from lack of 1st downs or lack of points and necessitating a come back

 

[XPack]

All run plays, huh! We should have traded Rodgers and kept Hundley.

 

[El Guapo]

I can't tell how much XPack is kidding, but in a thread the other week there was similar sentiment that if anybody suggested that we run the ball more that it had to be taken to the extreme conclusion of taking the ball out of Rodgers' hands. That's ridiculous. Better balance between the running and passing attack will improve our offense. The real question is always what else needs to happen so that Rodgers isn't "frustrated" with the offense.

 

[Arod2gjdd]

It's not a matter of run versus pass. They just have to run actual routes and execute and stop overthinking offensive football

 

[Arod2gjdd]

Graham making a contested catch wouldn't hurt. Dude has to be wide open

 

[Deleted member 6794]

The Packers definitely need to run the ball more often. The team currently ranks second in the league in passing percentage while according to Football Outsider having the fourth most efficient rushing attack.

 

[Mondio]

The Packers definitely need to run the ball more often. The team currently ranks second in the league in passing percentage while according to Football Outsider having the fourth most efficient rushing attack.

I think those stats are skewed though a bit. I do agree we need balance. We need flow to a game. They just need to make it work. To be a "real" running team or have a real type rushing attack, we need to be able to line up and consistently get the tough yards. We haven't. I know Jones is tough at times, but 3,4,5 yards on a tough run stacked defense is necessary. Consistently it has to be done to be that team. Williams might get 2,3 when nothing is there, Jones is very dynamic and can fit thru some tight spots, but he can also get knocked down for a 0-2 gainer too. I know this happens to everyone.

What I'm getting at is I don't trust them to come back to a run and then get 6 yards unless the defense is playing pass. It seems all of our big runs are built off passing. It's pass, pass, pass and when it's working the Bam, delay up the middle to Jones with everyone running down field and a defense hell bent on getting to the QB and he rips off 30 yards. Looks great for rushing stats and efficiency, but it's not a traditionally strong running attack.

That would look like, Jones/Williams into the line 4 yards, into the line 6 yards, stretch play 7 yards, into the line 3 yards, into the line 4 yards, play action hit MVS deep for a 60 yard TD when the safeties are brought up to stop the run. Our run game is completely different and set up with pass. Until they can start pounding it, and actually pounding it for a few first downs, nobody is going to care about anything to do with our run game, including our own coaches.

I'm not saying we can't do it, I just don't think our coach or our QB are wired to do it. and if you're going to commit to it, you have to commit to it because it takes time to develop that blocking, that mindset etc. and in a league predicated on passing, with a historically efficient passer, I don't think they're going to do it.

 

[sschind]

I think those stats are skewed though a bit. I do agree we need balance. We need flow to a game. They just need to make it work. To be a "real" running team or have a real type rushing attack, we need to be able to line up and consistently get the tough yards. We haven't. I know Jones is tough at times, but 3,4,5 yards on a tough run stacked defense is necessary. Consistently it has to be done to be that team. Williams might get 2,3 when nothing is there, Jones is very dynamic and can fit thru some tight spots, but he can also get knocked down for a 0-2 gainer too. I know this happens to everyone.

What I'm getting at is I don't trust them to come back to a run and then get 6 yards unless the defense is playing pass. It seems all of our big runs are built off passing. It's pass, pass, pass and when it's working the Bam, delay up the middle to Jones with everyone running down field and a defense hell bent on getting to the QB and he rips off 30 yards. Looks great for rushing stats and efficiency, but it's not a traditionally strong running attack.

That would look like, Jones/Williams into the line 4 yards, into the line 6 yards, stretch play 7 yards, into the line 3 yards, into the line 4 yards, play action hit MVS deep for a 60 yard TD when the safeties are brought up to stop the run. Our run game is completely different and set up with pass. Until they can start pounding it, and actually pounding it for a few first downs, nobody is going to care about anything to do with our run game, including our own coaches.

I'm not saying we can't do it, I just don't think our coach or our QB are wired to do it. and if you're going to commit to it, you have to commit to it because it takes time to develop that blocking, that mindset etc. and in a league predicated on passing, with a historically efficient passer, I don't think they're going to do it.

Call it the Leroy Hoard phenomena "coach, you need 1 yard I'll get you 3 yards. You need 5 yards I'll get you 3 yards"

In a very simplistic way of putting it I'd rather have a back with a 5 yard average who never got less than 3 than one with a 5 yard average who breaks one for 30 yards occasionally and gains 0 or 1 on half his other carries. I know the latter is more realistic but like you said a running game that can produce 3,4,5, yards a carry consistently will open up the passing game and let the QB have those 30 yard passes. On the other hand it is always nice to have the RB who is a threat to break it every time he touches the ball and if you don't have that guy the defense won't care about the run on any down with more than 3 yards to go.

 

[El Guapo]

I would argue that Jones isn't just making hay on delayed handoffs. He's doing it on designed running plays and good blocks by the O-line.

 

[Mondio]

He has some. But consistency is key and consistently his success is predicated on running against passing defenses and consistently under perform against any sort of run front. Until we can line amd average 4.x yards per carry on 20-25 touches a game with a long of 9 yards, nobody is going to care about our run game

 

[El Guapo]

Until we actually try to commit to the run game, we'll never know what we have there. What we have is a broken passing attack. No discussion there.

A good read that naturally supports my theory: https://packerswire.usatoday.com/20...le-lack-of-balance-dooms-offense-vs-patriots/

When Favre regressed under Mike Sherman, Ahman Green was there to take the heat off. Eventually Favre turned things around (under Mike McCarthy). I'm not saying that Rodgers is in that kind of slump this year, but he's not just running with one cylinder down. We're working like a v8 with three plugs out. When Adams, MVS, or Graham makes a great catch it's like someone poured an ounce of Liquid Schwartz into the offense's tank, but it's never enough.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Heyjoe4]

without the context it doesn't say much. We had 10 possessions. 3 of which were deemed a "good mix" so out of 7 more, 1 at the end of a half with 2 minutes. pass heavy seems appropriate to me. So 6 drives, 2 more are late in the 4th with us trailing and not great field position. Can't say I have a huge problem being passcentric in those situations. so we're down to 4 other possessions to critique.

I remember the one with 2 good runs and then pass, pass, pass. It was Williams and after the 2 good ones they brought another defender or 2 to the box and we set up a little dump off then with the other receivers taking defenders down field, Bulaga got beat, Williams never made it to the 'drop zone" and Rodgers goes to what he wants to do. The others i don't remember that well. 1 appears we had a good first run, then a pass for 1st down, the other looks like a run, probably not a productive one, with 2nd and 3rd and longs. Anyway, context is always important for me or we're only getting partial stories.

And context is really important in those earlier games where the Packers were down by 20 or so points. They almost have to pass in those situations, especially as the game rolls around to Q4. At least versus the Rams and Pats, they were able to keep the scores close. I don’t think they abandoned the run at any point in either of those games.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Until we actually try to commit to the run game, we'll never know what we have there. What we have is a broken passing attack. No discussion there.

A good read that naturally supports my theory: https://packerswire.usatoday.com/20...le-lack-of-balance-dooms-offense-vs-patriots/

When Favre regressed under Mike Sherman, Ahman Green was there to take the heat off. Eventually Favre turned things around (under Mike McCarthy). I'm not saying that Rodgers is in that kind of slump this year, but he's not just running with one cylinder down. We're working like a v8 with three plugs out. When Adams, MVS, or Graham makes a great catch it's like someone poured an ounce of Liquid Schwartz into the offense's tank, but it's never enough.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

You raise an important point. Rodgers has been off his game all year. The 1st game knee injury was/is big. He’s just not throwing from a solid stance. That may persist for a while, although I was glad to see the brace off. Time will tell, but time is running out. Might as well face it, they’re gonna need to win 7 of the next 8 games. 6 might do it, but my gut says no.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I would argue that Jones isn't just making hay on delayed handoffs. He's doing it on designed running plays and good blocks by the O-line.

Yeah the O line never gets the credit it deserves. I credit Jones with being strong, smart, and fast. And those one-gap holes created by the O line help, a lot.

 

[Heyjoe4]

I think those stats are skewed though a bit. I do agree we need balance. We need flow to a game. They just need to make it work. To be a "real" running team or have a real type rushing attack, we need to be able to line up and consistently get the tough yards. We haven't. I know Jones is tough at times, but 3,4,5 yards on a tough run stacked defense is necessary. Consistently it has to be done to be that team. Williams might get 2,3 when nothing is there, Jones is very dynamic and can fit thru some tight spots, but he can also get knocked down for a 0-2 gainer too. I know this happens to everyone.

What I'm getting at is I don't trust them to come back to a run and then get 6 yards unless the defense is playing pass. It seems all of our big runs are built off passing. It's pass, pass, pass and when it's working the Bam, delay up the middle to Jones with everyone running down field and a defense hell bent on getting to the QB and he rips off 30 yards. Looks great for rushing stats and efficiency, but it's not a traditionally strong running attack.

That would look like, Jones/Williams into the line 4 yards, into the line 6 yards, stretch play 7 yards, into the line 3 yards, into the line 4 yards, play action hit MVS deep for a 60 yard TD when the safeties are brought up to stop the run. Our run game is completely different and set up with pass. Until they can start pounding it, and actually pounding it for a few first downs, nobody is going to care about anything to do with our run game, including our own coaches.

I'm not saying we can't do it, I just don't think our coach or our QB are wired to do it. and if you're going to commit to it, you have to commit to it because it takes time to develop that blocking, that mindset etc. and in a league predicated on passing, with a historically efficient passer, I don't think they're going to do it.

Well, MM is not wired to run and never has been. But the scenarios for how you establish a running game are spot on. So it (the running game) can’t be an after thought. It needs to be built into the game plan. I haven’t seen that yet.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Graham making a contested catch wouldn't hurt. Dude has to be wide open

Yeah I haven’t seen him win many (any?) contested catches. I thought that was his specialty, given his size and strength. I’m willing to give him more time, but I still regret the day they let Jared Cook walk.....